Council Procedure Rule 12.6 provides for questions by any member of the Council to the Leader or any Portfolio Holder, without notice on:
(i) reports under item 8 above; or
(ii) any other matter of a non operational character in relation to the powers and duties of the Council or which affects all or part of the District or some or all of its inhabitants.
Council Procedure Rule 12.7 provides that answers to questions without notice may take the form of:
(a) direct oral answer from the Leader or, at the request of the Leader, from another member of the Cabinet;
(b) where the desired information is in a publication of the Council or other published work, a reference to that publication;
(c) where the reply cannot conveniently be given orally, a written answer circulated later to the questioner; or
(d) where the question relates to an operational matter, the Leader or a member of the Cabinet will request that a response be given direct to the questioner by the relevant Chief Officer.
In accordance with the Council Procedure Rule 12.8, a time limit of twenty minutes is set for questions. Any question not dealt with within the time available will receive a written reply. The Chairman may extend this period by up to a further 10 minutes to ensure that all political groups and independent members may have their questions answered.
Minutes:
(a) Car Parking in Epping
Councillor J M Whitehouse referred to the statement made earlier in the meeting by the Safer, Greener and Highways Portfolio Holder and asked when and how a decision would be taken in relation to a new tariff structure. He also asked what consultation would be undertaken in relation to this matter.
Councillor Waller, Safer, Greener and Highways Portfolio Holder advised that he was not yet in a position to provide more details about the tariffs and it had not yet been decided in which car park the 100 spaces would be provided. He confirmed that it was his intention to consult with Epping ward councillors and the Town Council in relation to this matter.
(b) Council Housing Estates – Signage
Councillor Watts stated that he had noticed that there was a lack of adequate signage on some of the Council’s housing estates. He asked the Housing Portfolio Holder if steps could be taken to rectify the position.
Councillor Stallan, Housing Portfolio Holder stated that he would discuss this matter with Housing Officers and would establish whether finance available within the Enhancement Fund could be used to improve signage.
(c) Epping Parking Review
Councillor J H Whitehouse asked the Safer, Greener and Highways Portfolio Holder when outstanding issues in relation to the Epping Parking Review would be completed.
Councillor Waller, Safer, Greener and Highways Portfolio Holder stated that he was reluctant to provide timescales as this was a matter which was outside of his control as the works were being implemented by Essex County Council as a contractor on behalf of the District Council. He continued however, that it was a priority for him to get matters completed as quickly as possible.
(d) Careline
Councillor Lea asked the Housing Portfolio Holder if he was in a position to provide more information about the future of the Epping Forest Careline in the light of Essex County Council’s proposals for a county-wide Telecare contract.
Councillor Stallan, Housing Portfolio Holder advised that the comments made by District Councillors at the last Council meeting had been reported to and taken into account by County Councillors. He reported that County Council officers were gathering information to assist County Members in making a decision and account would be taken of the possible impact on current local provision. Councillor Stallan stated that he would work with officers to ensure that local residents received a good service whichever option was pursued by the County Council.
(e) Former Laundry Site, Bower Hill, Epping
Councillor Avey asked the Safer, Greener and Highways Portfolio Holder if any steps were being taken to acquire land in Bower Hill in order to provide additional car parking.
Councillor Waller, Safer, Greener and Highways Portfolio Holder stated that the Council’s legal officers had made enquiries about the ownership of this land but it would not solve the problem of short-term parking in the town due to its distance from the High Street. He also pointed out whilst the site was close to the underground station there was still space available within the station car park which suggested that additional land was not required for that purpose.
(f) Recycling of Litter in Litter Bins
Councillor Wixley referred to the Council’s good record in relation to recycling and suggested this could be improved if steps were taken to recycle litter placed in litter bins. He asked the Environment Portfolio Holder if consideration would given to introducing bins similar to those in some London Boroughs which comprised of four separate compartments for different types of litter.
Councillor Breare-Hall, Environment Portfolio Holder advised that the suggestion was timely in view of the current discussions taking place for a new contract. He agreed to take this suggestion forward to the Portfolio Holder Advisory Group on the Procurement of a new Waste Management Contract. He also agreed to publish the outcome of those discussions in the Council Bulletin.
(g) District Musuem – Heritage Lottery Fund Grant
Councillor Smith drew attention to the item in the Leisure and Wellbeing Portfolio Holder’s written report regarding the grant of £1.65 million to extend and completely redevelop the Museum in Sun Street, Waltham Abbey. She asked the Portfolio Holder if any further details of the project could be provided at this time.
Councillor Webster, Leisure and Wellbeing Portfolio Holder, stated that her written report provided only a snapshot of what was proposed. She said that this was a very exciting project and that she would keep members informed of developments via the Council Bulletin.
(h) Benefits
Councillor Jennie Hart asked the Housing Portfolio Holder if it was correct that
a family or individual of working age in council housing and on Housing Benefit, and who may be in full time work, but could be having their income topped up by benefits would be penalised if they have an extra room by having their benefit reduced, whereas a similar family or individual of working age in council housing, who pay their own rent in full would not be charged for their extra room.
Councillor Stallan, Housing Portfolio Holder advised that he would need to seek advice from officers and that in liaison with the Finance and Technology Portfolio Holder he would publish a response in the Council Bulletin.